Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Apr 2014 14:40:25 +0800 | From | Gu Zheng <> | Subject | Re: f2fs: BUG_ON() is triggered when mount valid f2fs filesystem |
| |
Hi Alexey, Kim, On 04/18/2014 02:04 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> On 17.04.2014 00:45, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >> Hi, >> >> 2014-04-16 (수), 18:11 -0700, Alexey Khoroshilov: >>> Hi, >>> >>> But would not ability to trigger BUG_ON by mounting a crafted image >>> considered as an issue having security implications? >> Sorry, I can't come up with you. >> Could you please explain why this can be related to the security hole? >> Did you mean it needs to avoid such the BUG_ONs if the image has >> obsolete data being used before? > An ability to trigger a BUG_ON assert by mounting a crafted image is > usually considered as a local denial of service [1-3]. As far as I > understand, the reason is that some kernel data may become inconsistent > that can lead to further problems.
I think I caught the key point if I do not miss-read it. Alexey's misgiving is that users can mount a crafted or malicious image to trigger a BUG_ON, and results in the server panic, especially the normal user can do this via fuse,user_namespace... So it seems a leak that the user only mounts an invalid image, but results in denial of service. The following 3 cases also show this point. So the right way may be return the suitable *ERROR* to the user rather than trigger BUG_ON.
Regards, Gu
> > [1] http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-3353 > [2] http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/06/24/4 > [3] http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-2928 > etc. > > -- > Alexey > > >> On 16.04.2014 16:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> 2014-04-16 (수), 13:11 +0400, Andrey Tsyvarev: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> With this patch mounting of the image continues to fail (with similar >>>>> BUG_ON). >>>>> But when image is formatted again (and steps mentioned in the previous >>>>> message are performed), >>>>> mounting of it is now succeed. >>>>> >>>>> Is this is a true purpose of the patch? >>>> Indeed. The patch solves there-in root cause. >>>> But, if you're trying to use the failed image again, simply you can skip >>>> the errorneous part by: >>>> >>>> # mount ... -o disable_roll_forward ... >>>> >>>> Once sync or umount whatever checkpoint is done after that, the image >>>> will be mounted without "disable_roll_forward". >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> 15.04.2014 15:04, Jaegeuk Kim пишет: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for the report. >>>>>> I retrieved the fault image and found out that previous garbage data >>>>>> wreak such the wrong behaviors. >>>>>> So, I wrote the following patch that fills one zero-block at the >>>>>> checkpoint procedure. >>>>>> If the underlying device supports discard, I expect that it mostly >>>>>> doesn't incur any performance regression significantly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you test this patch? >>>>>> >>>>>> >From 60588ceb7277aae2a79e7f67f5217d1256720d78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>>>> From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com> >>>>>> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:57:55 +0900 >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: avoid to conduct roll-forward due to the remained >>>>>> garbage blocks >>>>>> >>>>>> The f2fs always scans the next chain of direct node blocks. >>>>>> But some garbage blocks are able to be remained due to no discard >>>>>> support or >>>>>> SSR triggers. >>>>>> This occasionally wreaks recovering wrong inodes that were used or >>>>>> BUG_ONs >>>>>> due to reallocating node ids as follows. >>>>>> >>>>>> When mount this f2fs image: >>>>>> http://linuxtesting.org/downloads/f2fs_fault_image.zip >>>>>> BUG_ON is triggered in f2fs driver (messages below are generated on >>>>>> kernel 3.13.2; for other kernels output is similar): >>>>>> >>>>>> kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/node.c:215! >>>>>> Call Trace: >>>>>> [<ffffffffa032ebad>] recover_inode_page+0x1fd/0x3e0 [f2fs] >>>>>> [<ffffffff811446e7>] ? __lock_page+0x67/0x70 >>>>>> [<ffffffff81089990>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x50/0x50 >>>>>> [<ffffffffa0337788>] recover_fsync_data+0x1398/0x15d0 [f2fs] >>>>>> [<ffffffff812b9e5c>] ? selinux_d_instantiate+0x1c/0x20 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811cb20b>] ? d_instantiate+0x5b/0x80 >>>>>> [<ffffffffa0321044>] f2fs_fill_super+0xb04/0xbf0 [f2fs] >>>>>> [<ffffffff811b861e>] ? mount_bdev+0x7e/0x210 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811b8769>] mount_bdev+0x1c9/0x210 >>>>>> [<ffffffffa0320540>] ? validate_superblock+0x210/0x210 [f2fs] >>>>>> [<ffffffffa031cf8d>] f2fs_mount+0x1d/0x30 [f2fs] >>>>>> [<ffffffff811b9497>] mount_fs+0x47/0x1c0 >>>>>> [<ffffffff81166e00>] ? __alloc_percpu+0x10/0x20 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811d4032>] vfs_kern_mount+0x72/0x110 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811d6763>] do_mount+0x493/0x910 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811615cb>] ? strndup_user+0x5b/0x80 >>>>>> [<ffffffff811d6c70>] SyS_mount+0x90/0xe0 >>>>>> [<ffffffff8166f8d9>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b >>>>>> >>>>>> Found by Linux File System Verification project (linuxtesting.org). >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-by: Andrey Tsyvarev <tsyvarev@ispras.ru> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 6 ++++++ >>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 1 + >>>>>> fs/f2fs/segment.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- >>>>>> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>>> index 4aa521a..890e23d 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c >>>>>> @@ -762,6 +762,12 @@ static void do_checkpoint(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>> bool is_umount) >>>>>> void *kaddr; >>>>>> int i; >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * This avoids to conduct wrong roll-forward operations and uses >>>>>> + * metapages, so should be called prior to sync_meta_pages below. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + discard_next_dnode(sbi); >>>>>> + >>>>>> /* Flush all the NAT/SIT pages */ >>>>>> while (get_pages(sbi, F2FS_DIRTY_META)) >>>>>> sync_meta_pages(sbi, META, LONG_MAX); >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>> index 2ecac83..2c5a5da 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>> @@ -1179,6 +1179,7 @@ int f2fs_issue_flush(struct f2fs_sb_info *); >>>>>> void invalidate_blocks(struct f2fs_sb_info *, block_t); >>>>>> void refresh_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *, block_t, block_t); >>>>>> void clear_prefree_segments(struct f2fs_sb_info *); >>>>>> +void discard_next_dnode(struct f2fs_sb_info *); >>>>>> int npages_for_summary_flush(struct f2fs_sb_info *); >>>>>> void allocate_new_segments(struct f2fs_sb_info *); >>>>>> struct page *get_sum_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *, unsigned int); >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c >>>>>> index 1e264e7..9993f94 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c >>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c >>>>>> @@ -335,13 +335,26 @@ static void locate_dirty_segment(struct >>>>>> f2fs_sb_info *sbi, unsigned int segno) >>>>>> mutex_unlock(&dirty_i->seglist_lock); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> -static void f2fs_issue_discard(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>> +static int f2fs_issue_discard(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>> block_t blkstart, block_t blklen) >>>>>> { >>>>>> sector_t start = SECTOR_FROM_BLOCK(sbi, blkstart); >>>>>> sector_t len = SECTOR_FROM_BLOCK(sbi, blklen); >>>>>> - blkdev_issue_discard(sbi->sb->s_bdev, start, len, GFP_NOFS, 0); >>>>>> trace_f2fs_issue_discard(sbi->sb, blkstart, blklen); >>>>>> + return blkdev_issue_discard(sbi->sb->s_bdev, start, len, GFP_NOFS, 0); >>>>>> +} >>>>>> + >>>>>> +void discard_next_dnode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) >>>>>> +{ >>>>>> + struct curseg_info *curseg = CURSEG_I(sbi, CURSEG_WARM_NODE); >>>>>> + block_t blkaddr = NEXT_FREE_BLKADDR(sbi, curseg); >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if (f2fs_issue_discard(sbi, blkaddr, 1)) { >>>>>> + struct page *page = grab_meta_page(sbi, blkaddr); >>>>>> + /* zero-filled page */ >>>>>> + set_page_dirty(page); >>>>>> + f2fs_put_page(page, 1); >>>>>> + } >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> static void add_discard_addrs(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>> > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > . >
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |